Total Posts:34|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Can a machine lie?

TUF
Posts: 21,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 3:29:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
This is something I was recently considering. If you punch in 1 + 1 on a calculator, and you get a 3, did the calculator lie to you?

You, and everyone else who took basic math classes, know that 1=1 obviously = 2.

So if your calculator gave you a 3, did it lie to you?

The main question is, can machines even lie, if they only do what they are programmed to do?

We have to ask ourselves, what constitutes being a lie.

Is a lie giving false information? Or is a lie giving false information while knowing the correct information?

I'll check back on this forum later to see what you here at DDO have to say about it.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
MattDescopa
Posts: 356
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 3:32:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 3:29:57 PM, TUF wrote:
This is something I was recently considering. If you punch in 1 + 1 on a calculator, and you get a 3, did the calculator lie to you?

You, and everyone else who took basic math classes, know that 1=1 obviously = 2.

So if your calculator gave you a 3, did it lie to you?

The main question is, can machines even lie, if they only do what they are programmed to do?

We have to ask ourselves, what constitutes being a lie.

Is a lie giving false information? Or is a lie giving false information while knowing the correct information?

I'll check back on this forum later to see what you here at DDO have to say about it.
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 3:55:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 3:29:57 PM, TUF wrote:
This is something I was recently considering. If you punch in 1 + 1 on a calculator, and you get a 3, did the calculator lie to you?
No.
You, and everyone else who took basic math classes, know that 1=1 obviously = 2.

So if your calculator gave you a 3, did it lie to you?

The main question is, can machines even lie, if they only do what they are programmed to do?
If they are programmed to lie.
We have to ask ourselves, what constitutes being a lie.

Is a lie giving false information? Or is a lie giving false information while knowing the correct information?

I'll check back on this forum later to see what you here at DDO have to say about it.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 4:01:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
When teachers told their students that the earth was flat they weren't lying. That's because intention needs to exist. You have to purposefully tell a falsehood. So no, they can't lie.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 4:32:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Can a machine tell you a false statement? Yes.

Can a machine tell you a false statement with the intent to mislead you? No.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 4:32:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 4:32:03 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Sure. But only if it's programmed to.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Chicken
Posts: 1,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 4:34:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Only if it is programmed to lie, or if it's intelligence vastly exceeds that of any human and it has a mind of it's own... Instead of the one it was programmed with
Disciple of Koopin
Right Hand Chicken of the Grand Poobah DDO Vice President FREEDO

Servant of Kfc
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 4:35:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 4:05:56 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
No, lying implies the intention of purposeful deceit. Machines aren't capable of that.

At 9/20/2012 4:32:36 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Can a machine tell you a false statement? Yes.

Can a machine tell you a false statement with the intent to mislead you? No.

Lying only implies it knows the correct answer and gives you something different.

Intent cannot be measured. It's only a vague perception we impose on things. So it's irrelevant.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 4:49:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 3:29:57 PM, TUF wrote:
This is something I was recently considering. If you punch in 1 + 1 on a calculator, and you get a 3, did the calculator lie to you?

You, and everyone else who took basic math classes, know that 1=1 obviously = 2.

So if your calculator gave you a 3, did it lie to you?

The main question is, can machines even lie, if they only do what they are programmed to do?

We have to ask ourselves, what constitutes being a lie.

Is a lie giving false information? Or is a lie giving false information while knowing the correct information?

I'll check back on this forum later to see what you here at DDO have to say about it.

Humans lie. Humans are constructed on the same principles that machines are so they are machines. If humans can lie then machines can lie.

Computers lie a lot. Consider what happens when you log out of Windows and it says "Saving settings..." for ~60 seconds. I don't know what Windows is doing but it's not saving any settingsb (at least not for 60 seconds). The programer causes Windows to lie. But Windows itself, I suppose, is lying since it knows it isn't saving settings. But I suppose it wouldn't be right to call that a lie because, in software, information isn't integrated to a sufficent degree for true deception to occur. In other words, the code that prints "Saving settings..." to the screen isn't in any way connected to or aware of the true operations that are going on in the background while the screen says "Saving settings...".
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 5:00:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I once came across some source code that showed a progress bar to the user in an application. Since there was no real way to show the user how far along the operation was, the programmer had caused the progress bar to be increase in a random fashion to simulate what an authentic progress bar would do. The programmer wanted the user to think the software was still alive and kicking so they wouldn't get frustrated and close the program. But the progress bar was still intended to effectivly decieve the user.

I thought this was morally wrong and removed the code LOL.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 5:12:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 4:35:42 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 9/20/2012 4:05:56 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
No, lying implies the intention of purposeful deceit. Machines aren't capable of that.

At 9/20/2012 4:32:36 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Can a machine tell you a false statement? Yes.

Can a machine tell you a false statement with the intent to mislead you? No.

Lying only implies it knows the correct answer and gives you something different.

Intent cannot be measured. It's only a vague perception we impose on things. So it's irrelevant.

Does it "know" the correct answer?

I'm not getting your point with intent. Is anything that can't be measured irrelevant?
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 6:06:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Fool: The can't lie the don't have intention.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
TUF
Posts: 21,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 6:20:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
other than vbacculum, it seems the general answer, is that something needs intent to lie for it to be a lie.

If I tell you that there are cows on pluto, though I have no Idea whether there are cows on pluto (yet have a generally good Idea that pluto can probably not sustain that kind of life), can you then call my statement a lie?
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 11:33:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 6:20:57 PM, TUF wrote:
other than vbacculum, it seems the general answer, is that something needs intent to lie for it to be a lie.

If I tell you that there are cows on pluto, though I have no Idea whether there are cows on pluto (yet have a generally good Idea that pluto can probably not sustain that kind of life), can you then call my statement a lie?

Yes because you're faking knowledge.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2012 11:47:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 6:20:57 PM, TUF wrote:
other than vbacculum, it seems the general answer, is that something needs intent to lie for it to be a lie.

If I tell you that there are cows on pluto, though I have no Idea whether there are cows on pluto (yet have a generally good Idea that pluto can probably not sustain that kind of life), can you then call my statement a lie?

When you say there are cows on Pluto, you are making two assertions: 1 There are cows on Pluto and 2: You know (or have some confidence that) there are cows on Pluto. If you don't, in fact, know that there are cows on Pluto then you are misrepresenting your conception of reality by making the statement, i.e., you are lying.

This is why religion is a lie. People have no evidence for typical religious claims yet the assert them as if they have evidence of them (or the equivalence of evidence). So they lie (almost always to children) when they make these claims because they are asserting that 1: the claim is true and 2: they know the claim is true. This second, implicit claim makes the explicit claim a lie.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
TUF
Posts: 21,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2012 2:09:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 11:33:08 PM, phantom wrote:
At 9/20/2012 6:20:57 PM, TUF wrote:
other than vbacculum, it seems the general answer, is that something needs intent to lie for it to be a lie.

If I tell you that there are cows on pluto, though I have no Idea whether there are cows on pluto (yet have a generally good Idea that pluto can probably not sustain that kind of life), can you then call my statement a lie?

Yes because you're faking knowledge.

So when a computer faakes knowledge, it is lying, right?
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2012 3:34:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 3:29:57 PM, TUF wrote:
This is something I was recently considering. If you punch in 1 + 1 on a calculator, and you get a 3, did the calculator lie to you?

You, and everyone else who took basic math classes, know that 1=1 obviously = 2.

So if your calculator gave you a 3, did it lie to you?

The main question is, can machines even lie, if they only do what they are programmed to do?

We have to ask ourselves, what constitutes being a lie.

Is a lie giving false information? Or is a lie giving false information while knowing the correct information?

I'll check back on this forum later to see what you here at DDO have to say about it.

Lying requires intent. The best a machine can do is facilitate a lie.

Thus, the current answer is no.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2012 3:38:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 4:49:40 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 9/20/2012 3:29:57 PM, TUF wrote:
This is something I was recently considering. If you punch in 1 + 1 on a calculator, and you get a 3, did the calculator lie to you?

You, and everyone else who took basic math classes, know that 1=1 obviously = 2.

So if your calculator gave you a 3, did it lie to you?

The main question is, can machines even lie, if they only do what they are programmed to do?

We have to ask ourselves, what constitutes being a lie.

Is a lie giving false information? Or is a lie giving false information while knowing the correct information?

I'll check back on this forum later to see what you here at DDO have to say about it.

Humans lie. Humans are constructed on the same principles that machines are so they are machines. If humans can lie then machines can lie.

????

Humans are constructed on the same principles are machines????

Humans aren't constructed, and although we have based some of the principles we applied to machines on life, including our own manifestation, that doesn't mean that each entity (man and machine) directly correspond.

Computers lie a lot. Consider what happens when you log out of Windows and it says "Saving settings..." for ~60 seconds. I don't know what Windows is doing but it's not saving any settingsb (at least not for 60 seconds). The programer causes Windows to lie. But Windows itself, I suppose, is lying since it knows it isn't saving settings.

Interesting... Lol, I love getting real knowledge from people who know. ^_^

But, that said, the computer isn't lying, because it's not aware of what it's displaying, and it's not displaying it with intent. Instead, it's presenting an image that it was programmed to present under given conditions.

I'm not a determinist, so perhaps this is why your argument is lost on me.

But I suppose it wouldn't be right to call that a lie because, in software, information isn't integrated to a sufficent degree for true deception to occur. In other words, the code that prints "Saving settings..." to the screen isn't in any way connected to or aware of the true operations that are going on in the background while the screen says "Saving settings...".

Well, yeah.

Exactly.
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2012 4:13:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/21/2012 2:09:07 PM, TUF wrote:
At 9/20/2012 11:33:08 PM, phantom wrote:
At 9/20/2012 6:20:57 PM, TUF wrote:
other than vbacculum, it seems the general answer, is that something needs intent to lie for it to be a lie.

If I tell you that there are cows on pluto, though I have no Idea whether there are cows on pluto (yet have a generally good Idea that pluto can probably not sustain that kind of life), can you then call my statement a lie?

Yes because you're faking knowledge.

So when a computer faakes knowledge, it is lying, right?

Yes, if software determines that, in order to reach its goal, it must misrepresent what it knows to be true to another rational agent, then it is lying. I don't know if AI has advanced to such an extent where this could happen though (at least, not in highly contrived context). So typically the lies computers tell us are those of the programmers.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2012 4:22:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/21/2012 3:38:46 PM, Ren wrote:
At 9/20/2012 4:49:40 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 9/20/2012 3:29:57 PM, TUF wrote:
This is something I was recently considering. If you punch in 1 + 1 on a calculator, and you get a 3, did the calculator lie to you?

You, and everyone else who took basic math classes, know that 1=1 obviously = 2.

So if your calculator gave you a 3, did it lie to you?

The main question is, can machines even lie, if they only do what they are programmed to do?

We have to ask ourselves, what constitutes being a lie.

Is a lie giving false information? Or is a lie giving false information while knowing the correct information?

I'll check back on this forum later to see what you here at DDO have to say about it.

Humans lie. Humans are constructed on the same principles that machines are so they are machines. If humans can lie then machines can lie.

????

Humans are constructed on the same principles are machines????

Humans aren't constructed, and although we have based some of the principles we applied to machines on life, including our own manifestation, that doesn't mean that each entity (man and machine) directly correspond.

Constructed through the process of evolution, perhaps? I don't follow your whan you mean by "directly correspond".

Human intelligence, like all animal intelligence, is the result of physical operations in the brain (perhaps I should have said "physical" where I said "mechanical" before). So a machine can *intend* deception (in principle) and thus can lie.


Computers lie a lot. Consider what happens when you log out of Windows and it says "Saving settings..." for ~60 seconds. I don't know what Windows is doing but it's not saving any settingsb (at least not for 60 seconds). The programer causes Windows to lie. But Windows itself, I suppose, is lying since it knows it isn't saving settings.

Interesting... Lol, I love getting real knowledge from people who know. ^_^

But, that said, the computer isn't lying, because it's not aware of what it's displaying, and it's not displaying it with intent. Instead, it's presenting an image that it was programmed to present under given conditions.

I'm not a determinist, so perhaps this is why your argument is lost on me.

But I suppose it wouldn't be right to call that a lie because, in software, information isn't integrated to a sufficent degree for true deception to occur. In other words, the code that prints "Saving settings..." to the screen isn't in any way connected to or aware of the true operations that are going on in the background while the screen says "Saving settings...".

Well, yeah.

Exactly.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2012 7:08:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/21/2012 2:09:07 PM, TUF wrote:
At 9/20/2012 11:33:08 PM, phantom wrote:
At 9/20/2012 6:20:57 PM, TUF wrote:
other than vbacculum, it seems the general answer, is that something needs intent to lie for it to be a lie.

If I tell you that there are cows on pluto, though I have no Idea whether there are cows on pluto (yet have a generally good Idea that pluto can probably not sustain that kind of life), can you then call my statement a lie?

Yes because you're faking knowledge.

So when a computer faakes knowledge, it is lying, right?

Well I should have said intentionally faking knowledge so no.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
TUF
Posts: 21,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2012 12:57:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/21/2012 4:13:40 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 9/21/2012 2:09:07 PM, TUF wrote:
At 9/20/2012 11:33:08 PM, phantom wrote:
At 9/20/2012 6:20:57 PM, TUF wrote:
other than vbacculum, it seems the general answer, is that something needs intent to lie for it to be a lie.

If I tell you that there are cows on pluto, though I have no Idea whether there are cows on pluto (yet have a generally good Idea that pluto can probably not sustain that kind of life), can you then call my statement a lie?

Yes because you're faking knowledge.

So when a computer faakes knowledge, it is lying, right?

Yes, if software determines that, in order to reach its goal, it must misrepresent what it knows to be true to another rational agent, then it is lying. I don't know if AI has advanced to such an extent where this could happen though (at least, not in highly contrived context). So typically the lies computers tell us are those of the programmers.
Good point mate.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
TUF
Posts: 21,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2012 12:58:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/21/2012 7:08:13 PM, phantom wrote:
At 9/21/2012 2:09:07 PM, TUF wrote:
At 9/20/2012 11:33:08 PM, phantom wrote:
At 9/20/2012 6:20:57 PM, TUF wrote:
other than vbacculum, it seems the general answer, is that something needs intent to lie for it to be a lie.

If I tell you that there are cows on pluto, though I have no Idea whether there are cows on pluto (yet have a generally good Idea that pluto can probably not sustain that kind of life), can you then call my statement a lie?

Yes because you're faking knowledge.

So when a computer faakes knowledge, it is lying, right?

Well I should have said intentionally faking knowledge so no.

I agree with you. Just hashing out the hazy lines :)
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2012 2:24:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 3:29:57 PM, TUF wrote:
This is something I was recently considering. If you punch in 1 + 1 on a calculator, and you get a 3, did the calculator lie to you?

You, and everyone else who took basic math classes, know that 1=1 obviously = 2.

So if your calculator gave you a 3, did it lie to you?

The main question is, can machines even lie, if they only do what they are programmed to do?

We have to ask ourselves, what constitutes being a lie.

Is a lie giving false information? Or is a lie giving false information while knowing the correct information?

I'll check back on this forum later to see what you here at DDO have to say about it.

No, it tells you that you have committed an OE "Operator Error" You pushed the wrong keys. Electronics don't fail that way. The only way a calculator would tell you 1+1=3 is to physicly change the chip programming. Computers and calculators only do what you tell them to do.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2012 7:30:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/20/2012 3:29:57 PM, TUF wrote:
This is something I was recently considering. If you punch in 1 + 1 on a calculator, and you get a 3, did the calculator lie to you?

You, and everyone else who took basic math classes, know that 1=1 obviously = 2.

So if your calculator gave you a 3, did it lie to you?

The main question is, can machines even lie, if they only do what they are programmed to do?

We have to ask ourselves, what constitutes being a lie.

Is a lie giving false information? Or is a lie giving false information while knowing the correct information?

I'll check back on this forum later to see what you here at DDO have to say about it.

If you lived in 5,000 B.C., and you asked someone if the world was a spheroid existing in a vacuum, and they said "no, the earth is flat" are they lying even if they've been told that and truly believe that?

They have provided you with misinformation, so how would it be different from your example of the calculator?
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2012 2:34:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
If it's the case that lying only requires giving false information, then what's the difference between lying and being wrong about something.

See, I think that there are three things going on:

1. Being Wrong: you have no intent to deceive, and are sincerely committed to whatever you're advancing. You just happen to be out of line with what is actually te case.

2. Lying: you have intent to deceive, and you know that you're advancing something false.

3. Bullshitting (as advanced by Frankfurt): you have an intent to manipulate, but you don't care (or know) whether what you're advancing is right or wrong--you're merely trying to be persuasive.

On my view, it seems that machines can only ever accomplish the first. Machines have no interests, because they're only fancy calculators, which means that they cannot in principle be motivated to deceive.

Humans, on the other hand, can do all three. We can be sincere-but-wrong about different propositions, we can intentionally lead people from the truth (e.g., "I didn't take any cookies from the cookie jar"), and we can bullsh*t, which is what formal competitive debate is all about--you're just trying to win the round, regardless of whether you really buy what you're advancing.

The "cows on Pluto" bit could, on this view, be construed as either of the latter two, since what's relevant is the way the intent plays out--liars care about the truth, but want to avoid it. Bullshitters just want to be persuasive, and don't care what's actually the case. Machines, on the other hand, are unmotivated. They just get stuff and apply non-emotive algorithms. If we could demonstrate that machines pursue interests, then we could say that lying is in principle possible for them. Otherwise, they're just a good example of rationality separated from everything else.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2012 2:38:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I guess the simple way of parsing it out is to say that what differentiates human and artificial cognition is response capacity. Because we have interests that cause us to react by evaluating and adapting, we can lie. We draw a conclusion, and we say "if X is true, but I have an interest in Y, then Z." So, when we come to conclusions, we do stuff about them. Machines can spit out the same answers, but it doesn't do anything with them.